Comparison of mechanical allodynia and recovery of locomotion and bladder function by different parameters of low thoracic spinal contusion injury in rats

10Citations
Citations of this article
30Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: The present study was designed to examine the functional recovery following spinal cord injury (SCI) by adjusting the parameters of impact force and dwell-time using the Infinite Horizon (IH) impactor device. Methods: Sprague-Dawley rats (225-240 g) were divided into eight injury groups based on force of injury (Kdyn) and dwell time (seconds), indicated as Force-Dwell time: 150-4, 150-3, 150-2, 150-1, 150-0, 200-0, 90-2 and sham controls, respectively. Results: After T10 SCI, higher injury force produced greater spinal cord displacement (P < 0.05) and showed a significant correlation (r = 0.813) between the displacement and the force (P < 0.05). In neuropathic pain-like behavior, the percent of paw withdrawals scores in the hindpaw for the 150-4, 150-3, 150-2, 150-1 and the 200-0 injury groups were significantly lowered compared with sham controls (P < 0.05). The recovery of locomotion had a significant within-subjects effect of time (P < 0.05) and the 150-0 group had increased recovery compared to other groups (P < 0.05). In addition, the 200-0 and the 90-2 recovered significantly better than all the 150 kdyn impact groups that included a dwell-time (P < 0.05). In recovery of spontaneous bladder function, the 150-4 injury group took significantly longer recovery time whereas the 150-0 and the 90-2 groups had the shortest recovery times. Conclusions: The present study demonstrates SCI parameters optimize development of mechanical allodynia and other pathological outcomes.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Carter, M. W., Johnson, K. M., Lee, J. Y., Hulsebosch, C. E., & Gwak, Y. S. (2016). Comparison of mechanical allodynia and recovery of locomotion and bladder function by different parameters of low thoracic spinal contusion injury in rats. Korean Journal of Pain, 29(2), 86–95. https://doi.org/10.3344/kjp.2016.29.2.86

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free